A Darn Good Letter, M & P Target 1939

[Gun Relics]

i just received the letter from S&WHF for my Model of 1905 4th Change, Military and Police Target.

The revolver was donated to Greenwich Revolver Club in 1939 for their first outdoor competition of the season. The letter states that the President of the club, William J. Mallin, requested a donated Smith and Wesson revolver by letter. Lt. Col. D.B. Wesson responded promptly, approved the request and suggested a pistol featuring the new "hump back hammer". So this is the give-away pistol, 6 inch M and P Target.

The package I received from Michael Helms contains a total of 14 pages of documentation in addition to the letter! I can't thank Mike enough for the thorough research and superb job he did.

As a footnote. I have contacted someone who is in Fairfield, CT who I believe is the great grandson of Mr. Mallin, to share the information with him.

The next post is from the 1937 S&W Catalog describing the M and P target.

 

[Gun Relics]

Here are the catalog Pages from 1937.

 

[goatsnguns]

Not to detract from a beautiful and significant gun, but that doesn't look like a Humpback Hammer, or at least what we call a Humpback Hammer today.

 

[DWalt]

It does not have a humpback hammer as pictured. They are very distinctive in appearance. The HBH was intended principally for single action target shooting. Someone here will probably post a picture of one. I do not know the historical details, but I believe they became extinct prior to the beginning of WWII.

 

[glowe]

Here are pages from a 1939 catalog.

 

[22hipower]

It does not have a humpback hammer as pictured. They are very distinctive in appearance. The HBH was intended principally for single action target shooting. Someone here will probably post a picture of one. I do not know the historical details, but I believe they became extinct prior to the beginning of WWII.

I don't have an HBH on a K frame but here's one on a RM.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

https://flic.kr/p/2n1ZZd2 https://www.flickr.com/photos/194934231@N03/

 

[rct269]

FOURTEEN PAGES??!!!!

What's up with THAT?!!!!

I'm just teasing--and mostly teasing myself.

I came across a 22/40 which turned out to have been given to Phillip B. Sharpe. I dutifully fired off a request to SWHF----expecting reams and volumes in return. I got one piece of paper----the invoice, charging off the cost to make the gun, and shipping it off to Maine to the Advertising Account---$14.55.

I decided giving away guns was no big deal---but they never gave one to me!!

The best part of the whole deal was when the letter arrived. I let out a shriek that brought the Boss Lady in to see what all the fuss was about. "A nothing letter?" she asked. "Quite the contrary my dear, quite the contrary!"

Ralph Tremaine

 

[DARE]

Here is a pic of the humpback hammer from the 1941 S&W catalog.

 

[bruce5781]

K frame on top, N on bottom.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

 

[bruce5781]

K frame on top, N on bottom.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Gun Relics]

It's possible there was an oversight when selecting the hammer when it was assembled. Let's put it this way, it was "supposed" to have a hump back hammer, Col. Wesson!

 

[22hipower]

It's possible there was an oversight when selecting the hammer when it was assembled. Let's put it this way, it was "supposed" to have a hump back hammer, Col. Wesson!

Or, as happens with stocks sometimes, someone at some point harvested it for another purpose. I think in this case I’d be looking for one to make it match the very interesting letter.

Jeff
SWCA 1457

 

[paplinker]

It's possible the winner decided he liked the standard hammer better. It would be interesting to find out who won it that year.

Also do the stocks number to the gun?
I find a lot of MP targets with the HBH at auction show magna stocks. Since most are not numbered it's hard to decide if that means anything.

By the way great gun with interesting history.
Do you think might ever return it to a HBH ?

 

[cgt4570]

It does not have a humpback hammer as pictured. They are very distinctive in appearance. The HBH was intended principally for single action target shooting. Someone here will probably post a picture of one. I do not know the historical details, but I believe they became extinct prior to the beginning of WWII.

I have a very early post war PD shipped M&P with HBH and pre-war style K magnas. There were a few left over apparently.

Side note. One of my K22 OD's has a HBH, and I have a spare or two in my stash.

 

[Gun Relics]

It's possible the winner decided he liked the standard hammer better. It would be interesting to find out who won it that year.

Also do the stocks number to the gun?
I find a lot of MP targets with the HBH at auction show magna stocks. Since most are not numbered it's hard to decide if that means anything.

By the way great gun with interesting history.
Do you think might ever return it to a HBH ?

The stocks do not match but they have the stamped serial number on them in a somewhat straight line with no retaining washer. They have a higher range serial number, I believe 900000 range, but look correct for the period.

It doesn't look like any of the sideplate screws have been touched so I would say it's likely the hammer here is original. I plan on leaving it as is. I just don't think they shipped it with the hump back hammer. But yet, another mystery in the Asphalt Jungle!

 

[22hipower]

It doesn't look like any of the sideplate screws have been touched so I would say it's likely the hammer here is original. I plan on leaving it as is. I just don't think they shipped it with the hump back hammer. But yet, another mystery in the Asphalt Jungle!

There are many here who can, with the proper tools, remove side plates repeatedly and leave no evidence of doing so.

You may think it wasn't shipped with the HBH hammer, and perhaps it wasn't, but in the collector community it is the letter that rules, not what we think might have been the case. In this case you've got a rather unique find and the kind of letter we all hope to get. It's yours though so if you want to leave it as it came to you that's fine. Great gun, great letter! Congrats.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[Gun Relics]

There are many here who can, with the proper tools, remove side plates repeatedly and leave no evidence of doing so.

You may think it wasn't shipped with the HBH hammer, and perhaps it wasn't, but in the collector community it is the letter that rules, not what we think might have been the case. In this case you've got a rather unique find and the kind of letter we all hope to get. It's yours though so if you want to leave it as it came to you that's fine. Great gun, great letter! Congrats.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

That's a valid point. Well it couldn't hurt to add one to my list, though I'm not sure where one will come up. If anybody knows of a HBH hammer for sale for a K frame, I would be interested.

 

[paplinker]

That's a valid point. Well it couldn't hurt to add one to my list, though I'm not sure where one will come up. If anybody knows of a HBH hammer for sale for a K frame, I would be interested.

It's worth starting early looking for one. The center fire K frame HBH is harder to find than the rimfire. If you come across a good one,jump on it.

Good luck

 

[22hipower]

That's a valid point. Well it couldn't hurt to add one to my list, though I'm not sure where one will come up. If anybody knows of a HBH hammer for sale for a K frame, I would be interested.

I think I'd contact cgt4570 (post 14 above) as he says he's got a couple in his stash.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[Matt_X]

The stocks do not match but they have the stamped serial number on them in a somewhat straight line with no retaining washer. They have a higher range serial number, I believe 900000 range, but look correct for the period.

It doesn't look like any of the sideplate screws have been touched so I would say it's likely the hammer here is original. I plan on leaving it as is. I just don't think they shipped it with the hump back hammer. But yet, another mystery in the Asphalt Jungle!

Interesting to see you post that in light of this recent post.
https://smith-wessonforum.com/142145444-post22.html



As with all historical objects, sometimes the artifact reveals things that even primary source documentation indicates different. While not apples to apples, a portion of the carbine collector community now prefers 'uncorrected' examples. (It's not apples to apples because every manufacturer subcontracted parts and not every transfer has been documented). I think you should do what you think is right based on the evidence and your own persepective.